"Dark Horse" copyright infringement ruling

[Ou_Tis]

"Katy Perry's 'Dark Horse' was copied from a Christian rap song, a California jury says"

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/30/entertai ... index.html

Seems ridiculous. Could be a chilling precedent, and/or spark many more terrible lawsuits.

"renowned musicologist and professor Todd Decker testified before a jury. [...] suggested Perry outright copied Gray’s ‘Joyful Noise’ on ‘Dark Horse.’ [...] both songs’ eight-note ‘ostinato’ share “five or six points of similarity.” This includes the pitch, rhythm, texture, patterns of repetition, melodic shape, and timbre. [...]

New York University professor and pianist Lawrence Ferrara explained the only true similarity both ‘Joyful Noise’ and ‘Dark Horse’ share is four notes – C, B, A, and E – played in an 'elementary manner.'

This, said the NYU professor, could be found in many classic songs, including ‘Mary Had a Little Lamb’ and ‘Merrily We Roll Along.’"

https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2019/0 ... rse-day-3/

[wagtunes]

The whole thing is a joke. I can't even take this ruling seriously. But it does put this whole industry under a whole different kind of microscope.

Let the avalanche of lawsuits begin.

[SoundPorn]

This will never reach a ruling, people do this to songs that make that much money because 99% of the time the label will settle out of court just to make it go away and not even take a chance.

[Ou_Tis]

This will never reach a ruling, people do this to songs that make that much money because 99% of the time the label will settle out of court just to make it go away and not even take a chance.

It already did: "Katy Perry and other defendants in a lawsuit surrounding her 2013 hit 'Dark Horse' must pay $2.78 million after a jury found that the track copied a 2008 Christian rap song titled 'Joyful Noise' by Flame"

https://www.msn.com/en-au/entertainment ... ?li=AA59yp

Hopefully it will be overturned on appeal.

[vurt]

leave katy alone you bastards

[jochicago]

It was worse with Blurred Lines and they lost the appeal. We are in an unprecedented era where anything that feels "similar" is fair game. If you used electric guitars in your song then you are plagiarizing any other song with an electric guitar. If you have a solo you are plagiarizing anything with a solo. If you used a C chord you've plagiarized any song with a C chord.

If you didn't steal a single note, nor the chord structure, nor the lyrics, then you stole "the feel" of the song. Anything and everything can be considered plagiarism of something.

[experimental.crow]

It was worse with Blurred Lines and they lost the appeal. We are in an unprecedented era where anything that feels "similar" is fair game. If you used electric guitars in your song then you are plagiarizing any other song with an electric guitar. If you have a solo you are plagiarizing anything with a solo. If you used a C chord you've plagiarized any song with a C chord.

If you didn't steal a single note, nor the chord structure, nor the lyrics, then you stole "the feel" of the song. Anything and everything can be considered plagiarism of something.

hey !..
i said that last week !..

[vurt]

to be honest i thought this was going to be about comic books

[jochicago]

It was worse with Blurred Lines and they lost the appeal. We are in an unprecedented era where anything that feels "similar" is fair game. If you used electric guitars in your song then you are plagiarizing any other song with an electric guitar. If you have a solo you are plagiarizing anything with a solo. If you used a C chord you've plagiarized any song with a C chord.

If you didn't steal a single note, nor the chord structure, nor the lyrics, then you stole "the feel" of the song. Anything and everything can be considered plagiarism of something.

hey !..
i said that last week !..

Yes, but your comment had words in English, and I've said some things in English before. So your original comment was plagiarizing the "feel" of making comments online in English, which I had developed first. You also used many of the same words I had used, and your paragraph lengths were similar to mine.

In short, you owe me $2million.

[mgw38]

These rulings are usually based on the financial implications of the particular situation. Katy Perry's net worth is reported to be $330 million. The $2.75 million fine is probably just enough to annoy her a bit. If the court would considered this a serious case of plagiarism the fine would have been much higher. Certainly not something anybody here needs to be concerned about. Frivolous law suits have become part of the equation. People who make a lot of money factor that into their business planning.

[Ou_Tis]

These rulings are usually based on the financial implications of the particular situation. Katy Perry's net worth is reported to be $330 million. The $2.75 million fine is probably just enough to annoy her a bit. If the court would considered this a serious case of plagiarism the fine would have been much higher. Certainly not something anybody here needs to be concerned about. Frivolous law suits have become part of the equation. People who make a lot of money factor that into their business planning.

"The jurors decided that the instrumental riff the two sides were fighting over was responsible for 22.5 percent of the success of 'Dark Horse' and handed out the awards accordingly".

https://www.inquirer.com/entertainment/ ... 90802.html

"The jury heard testimony from musicologists on the disputed section of the two songs [...] While jurors were told to consider only those sections, they gave a surprisingly sweeping verdict Monday that held all six songwriters responsible for copying "Joyful Noise." That included Perry, who wrote only lyrics, her co-lyricist Sarah Hudson, and Juicy J, who only provided a rap verse for the song."

"Perry herself was hit for just over $550,000, with Capitol Records responsible for the biggest part of the award — $1.2 million. [...] Perry's five co-writers were each given penalties to pay that ranged from about $60,000 for Dr. Luke to more than $250,000 for Martin."

Seems like the jurors were unable to follow basic instructions---like only considering the disputed section of the song.

I'd like to think the jurors wanted to help out a struggling artist at the expense of a wealthy pop star. But corporations / wealthy people have a huge advantage in filing these sorts of lawsuits... and if streaming services expand their preemptive take-downs of potential copyright violations, or force creators to preemptively give over monetization to large corporations, it could have a major chilling effect....

[wagtunes]

These rulings are usually based on the financial implications of the particular situation. Katy Perry's net worth is reported to be $330 million. The $2.75 million fine is probably just enough to annoy her a bit. If the court would considered this a serious case of plagiarism the fine would have been much higher. Certainly not something anybody here needs to be concerned about. Frivolous law suits have become part of the equation. People who make a lot of money factor that into their business planning.

"The jurors decided that the instrumental riff the two sides were fighting over was responsible for 22.5 percent of the success of 'Dark Horse' and handed out the awards accordingly".

https://www.inquirer.com/entertainment/ ... 90802.html

"The jury heard testimony from musicologists on the disputed section of the two songs [...] While jurors were told to consider only those sections, they gave a surprisingly sweeping verdict Monday that held all six songwriters responsible for copying "Joyful Noise." That included Perry, who wrote only lyrics, her co-lyricist Sarah Hudson, and Juicy J, who only provided a rap verse for the song."

"Perry herself was hit for just over $550,000, with Capitol Records responsible for the biggest part of the award — $1.2 million. [...] Perry's five co-writers were each given penalties to pay that ranged from about $60,000 for Dr. Luke to more than $250,000 for Martin."

Seems like the jurors were unable to follow basic instructions---like only considering the disputed section of the song.

I'd like to think the jurors wanted to help out a struggling artist at the expense of a wealthy pop star. But corporations / wealthy people have a huge advantage in filing these sorts of lawsuits... and if streaming services expand their preemptive take-downs of potential copyright violations, or force creators to preemptively give over monetization to large corporations, it could have a major chilling effect....

Eh, the business went to hell in a hand cart a long time ago.

[Ou_Tis]

Eh, the business went to hell in a hand cart a long time ago.

Even aside from monetization, there are issues like this: "Flame claims Perry also destroyed his reputation in Christian music circles because he's now associated with the anti-Christian witchcraft and imagery that's present in her 'Dark Horse' music vid."

Streaming service's algorithm matches a portion of your song to generic music claimed by Christian Records, they say "this is immoral/against our values/she's a witch!" and demand it be taken down....

https://www.tmz.com/2019/07/30/katy-per ... ages-550k/

[acYm]

make kindergarten-level "music", get sued by "christian rap artist"
basic "you reap what you sow" case here.

[telecode]

I listened to the Christian dudes tune on YT. I hear a semblance.

What I am confused about is, don't these modern pop stars write songs with an army of songwriters that munch over the tune perfectly crafting it into a hit. You telling me 5 people all just swiped a Christian dudes song because they can't come up with anything between themselves?